THE government's decision to approve the £3bn public transport bid leaves the ball firmly in Greater Manchester's court.
Does the region want massive public transport improvements if the price is a congestion charge of up to £5 a day at current prices?
Make no mistake: if the 10 councils of Greater Manchester agree in a vote later this year, both things WILL happen.
But before then, there will be plenty of debate.
The start date for 12 weeks of public consultation will be announced next week, after the government formally makes its offer on Monday. What form the consultation will take remains unclear, but a Greater Manchester-wide referendum has been ruled out.
Details
Crucially, details of both the charge scheme and the proposed improvements - kept private while the region waited to hear if it would get the cash - will now be revealed.
The MEN understands some significant changes to the original plans have been made, including the scrapping of separate, smaller charge zones around the satellite towns.
The essentials - two zones around the city centre policed by a tag-and-beacon system, remain in place. Drivers will pay for tags which will be electronically scanned at gates where the two zones start. Charges will only apply at peak times to drivers travelling `with' rush-hour traffic.
Next week's announcement will end speculation that the government was backtracking on its support for local congestion charging schemes.
Bid
Ministers made it clear that the pot from which Greater Manchester's money will come - the Transport Innovation Fund (TIF) - was only available to towns and cities prepared to introduce such charges. Greater Manchester was the first to lodge a bid and expected a decision by December 2007.
But delays and the fact only Cambridgeshire lodged a rival bid led many commentators to believe the fund might be scrapped or changed.
The waiting has also caused deep divisions among Greater Manchester councils. Tory-run Trafford and Bury have pledged to vote `no', as has Lib Dem-led Stockport. Bolton will hold a local referendum. Labour-run Manchester, Salford, Wigan, Tameside, Oldham - plus Rochdale, held by the Lib Dems - are still in favour.
But that won't be enough. Under current voting rules, seven out of the 10 councils must say `yes' if congestion charging, and the £3bn, is to become a reality.
What do you think? Have your say.
Tweet
What next for C-charge?
June 07, 2008
GREEN LIGHT Public consultation on congestion charging should start soon
Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All
Technobabble, Manchester (07/06/2008 at 11:48)
"What form the consultation will take remains unclear, but a Greater Manchester-wide referendum has been ruled out." Quelle surprise! Of course they never wanted to give you a REAL say in the matter, just the illusion of one. Can’t have a repeat of the Edinburgh referendum, can we.
"Drivers will pay for tags which will be electronically scanned at gates where the two zones start." So even if you only MIGHT travel across these zones during rush hour on the odd occasion, you will still be forced to pay for an electronic tag in your car for tracking purposes. What about someone travelling into Manchester for the first time, perhaps for a business meeting? Are they supposed to buy a tag in advance like some kind of soviet travel visa?
"Under current voting rules, seven out of the 10 councils must say 'yes' if congestion charging, and the £3bn, is to become a reality." Would these "current" voting rules be the ones created AFTER the bid was started and it became clear that the old voting rules wouldn’t allow the Labour councils to force it through?? If at first you don’t succeed, move the goalposts.
Manchester Dale, Manchester (07/06/2008 at 11:58)
Chris, Irlam (07/06/2008 at 12:35)
A real mockery of democracy this is!
ace, manchester (07/06/2008 at 13:26)
Munkey Boy, Audenshaw, Manchester (07/06/2008 at 13:38)
Fair question Chris, and I'd like to know too. I'll guess there'll be an announcement once this is official.
Technobabble: "What about someone travelling into Manchester for the first time, perhaps for a business meeting? Are they supposed to buy a tag in advance like some kind of soviet travel visa?"
I'd guess it'll be like London where you buy a day pass which is matched against your license plate? It's not untried technology.
Sean Corker MART, Manchester (07/06/2008 at 15:05)
Any other form of consultation will be open to accusations of gerrymandering and manipulation risking discontent, anger and civil unrest for years to come.
MsD, Manchester (07/06/2008 at 15:33)
Kurt Stephens, Sale (07/06/2008 at 16:08)
I reckon with such a tiny number of people who would be affected by the congestion charge in Bolton (something like 5% of the population isn't it) and the massive gains in public transport (don't a simialr amount of people in BMC also use public transport to get into Manchester) they'll amost certainly be voting in a manner that means Bolton council will back the bid.
I also fully expect Stockport to back the bid, having got re-assurances that they'll be getting a fair slice of the TIF cake I think they'll see it as too good an offer to turn down.
Of the other two, Bury and Trafford, I can actually see Bury supporting the plan, but even if they don't 8 - 2 will be good enough.
Happy days, happy days indeed. Manchester will soon have the transport system it deserves, and a sensible fair way of regulating the road traffic.
Fran M (Permissum Populus Constituo), Stockport (07/06/2008 at 18:04)
You are absolutely right about Stockport, the anti CON tax stance of the council is merely posturing and the opposition to the tax is very soft.
However, I am disappointed at the joy displayed at the advent of the removal of more freedoms, increased monitoring, loss of privacy and increased social control.
I am reminded of Martin Niemoller poem when I see such ambivalence to more state control and also the continual extension of police powers.
We saw more of this with the fuel protests this week. It may have been bluster by the police, saying that they would impound trucks and rescind operators licences if these trucks were involved in future protests, however these things have to be seen in their entirety.
The incessant encroaching of the state into our lives is much more important than having to endure a traffic jam or the cost of a CON tax. Where is it going to stop, or will it stop. If we cheer on the authorities when they impose more controls based on our own prejudices there will always be plenty of cheerleaders. Until of course, they come for you.
Sean Corker MART, Manchester (07/06/2008 at 18:18)
Good luck
Kurt Stephens, Sale (07/06/2008 at 19:08)
I truely hope that Mr Ottewell's FOI request is released in full now, giving the population as a whole the details of the bid, as opposed to the scare stories that have been put out by MART and their like.
oh, and kettle, meet Mr pot who is black if you want to start talking about gerrymandering. Shall we discuss certain companies involvement in Irlam in the local elections?
ManchesterLad, Manchester (07/06/2008 at 19:16)
Les Swain, Manchester (07/06/2008 at 19:30)
Kurt Stephens, Sale (07/06/2008 at 19:35)
Stockport MBC have never said that they are opposed to the idea of congestion charging, it was the fine detail of the TIF bid that they had a problem with.
They have no ideological problems with charging people to drive their cars through a congestion charge, they simply want to ensure that they don't get the short straw when it comes to TIF money being allocated.
I have no doubt whatsoever that this will be sorted out before any voting takes place.
Likewise, I think that Bolton will vote YES for the bid, as although the Boltonians will vote against having a congestion charge around Bolton town centre, they won't vote against the M60 boundary as is in the TIF bid.
For those of us who want greater accessibility to transport and mobility for a greater proportion of the population, especially the poor, the old and the infirm, today will be a landmark day.
Paul Peters (07/06/2008 at 20:50)
Fran M (Permissum Populus Constituo), Stockport (08/06/2008 at 11:57)
I haven't heard anything from Dave Goddard and there is absolutely nothing on SMBC website about it, so you are right, they will vote in favour when it comes to the crunch despite what the people of Stockport think.
However, the main theme of my post was regarding the increasing, insidious growth of government control of our lives, increasing surveillance and the loss of privacy. And often the calls for these infringements of our liberties are coming from pressure groups with their own prejudices and agendas. Unfortunately these pressure groups are often pushing at an open door, especially with the control freakery politicians we have today.
With the post war generation these restrictions on our liberties would never have been tolerated. The concept of a free, independent, autonomous individual in a free society is quickly passing into history and that for me is a tragedy and extremely regrettable.
The CON tax is just one more example of these government intrusions into our lives and what is most disappointing is the cheerleading coming from certain quarters.
The CON tax will not stop with the existing proposals. It will be extended further and further as the powers that be become emboldened by the lack of opposition and encouragement from groups with an axe to grind.
This may all sound extremely theoretical and philosophical but an examination of the way the surveillance and control society has developed over the past quarter of a century bears this out. The acceptance of these continued encroachments into our lives will only lead to more. And that will be the true legacy of the CON tax. We may be able to live with the CON tax but do we want to go where it will help lead?
Visions and Patterns (08/06/2008 at 12:24)
Maybe Manchester can now get the public transport system it deserves.
PW, Manchester (08/06/2008 at 14:52)
Sean Corker MART, Manchester (08/06/2008 at 15:18)
I was there on the ground in Irlam and I know exactly what the situation was. It is perfectly understandable that you would try every trick in the book to cast doubt on Jones' demise, for your side there are a lot of business interests to protect. Contracts worth hundreds of millions for toll collection, infrastructure costs etc etc. You are however wrong - but until the electoral commission finish their investigation you are able to spread your 'opinion' unchallenged - but that was the point though wasn't it?
Mark,Radcliffe. (08/06/2008 at 19:59)
didarunna2spain, Tarragona Spain. (08/06/2008 at 20:34)
rammylad, ramsbottom (08/06/2008 at 21:05)
Good to see Dicky Leeses comments about Labour being rewarded in the long term for its vision. Yes Dicky, we will reward you at the next election, we will give you the opourtunity to examine closely other forms of employment, now theres reward for a man of teh people.
Bill Green-Chorlton, Chorlton cum Hardy (08/06/2008 at 21:25)
Pentest (09/06/2008 at 09:19)
Just to be hoped the working people of Manchester kick it out. All it will achieve if it goes though, is the end of Manchester as a thriving city. Shops and businesses will be closing left right and centre ...Make no mistake about it.
Munkey Boy, Audenshaw, Manchester (09/06/2008 at 10:20)
There's no precedent for this reaction. No other city that has introduced congestion charging has become a ghost town, why would Manchester be the exception? I think quite the opposite - a decent public transport system would surely only attract visitors and make the city more attractive.